Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 1 of 13
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`
`Case No. _______________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`CTP INNOVATIONS, LLC,
` )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
` JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`ORIGINAL IMPRESSIONS, LLC,
` )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
` )
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`______________________________________________________________________________
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`______________________________________________________________________________
`
`Plaintiff CTP Innovations, LLC, for its Complaint against Defendant Original
`
`Impressions, LLC, states as follows:
`
`I. THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff CTP Innovations, LLC (“CTP”) is a Delaware limited liability company.
`
`2. Upon information and belief, Defendant Original Impressions, LLC (“Defendant”)
`
`is a Florida Corporation with its principal place of business located at 12900 SW 89th Court,
`
`Miami, Florida 33176. Defendant does business in the State of Florida, including in this District.
`
`Defendant may be served with process through service upon its registered agent, Miami Center
`
`Registered Agents, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida 33131.
`
`II. NATURE OF ACTION
`
`3.
`
`This is a patent infringement action to stop Defendant’s infringement of U.S. Patent
`
`Nos. 6,611,349 (the “‘349 Patent”) and 6,738,155 (the “‘155 Patent”).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 1
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 2 of 13
`
`III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`4.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
`
`and 1338(a) because it arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, United States Code,
`
`Title 35.
`
`5. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(c) and 1400(b). On
`
`information and belief, Defendant has a regular and established place of business in this district,
`
`has transacted business in this district, and/or has committed acts of patent infringement in this
`
`district.
`
`6. On information and belief, Defendant is subject to this Court’s specific and general
`
`personal jurisdiction pursuant to due process and/or the Florida Long Arm Statute, due at least to
`
`its substantial business in this forum including but not limited to: (i) at least a portion of the
`
`infringements alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other
`
`persistent courses of conduct, and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods and services
`
`provided to individuals in Florida and in this district.
`
`IV. GENERAL SUMMARY OF THE TECHNOLOGY AT ISSUE
`
`7.
`
`The inventions in the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents relate generally to the field of
`
`publishing and printing.
`
`8. More specifically, the inventions relate to systems and methods of providing
`
`publishing and printing services via a communication network involving computer to plate
`
`technology.
`
`9.
`
`Simplistically, computer to plate technology involves transferring an image to
`
`printing plate without the middle step of creating a film of the image that is imprinted on the
`
`plate. The plate is then used in a printing press to transfer the image to different types of media,
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 2
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 3 of 13
`
`for example, but not by way of limitation, newspaper, card stock, or standard paper. By directly
`
`transferring the image to the plate, the printing company eliminates the need for film and related
`
`developer chemicals, improves image quality, and may produce plates more quickly. The
`
`claimed methods and systems provide a solution for communicating and managing printing and
`
`publishing services without the need to physically transfer copies of design files and proofs
`
`through workflows that result in the generation of a plate ready file.
`
`V. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTIONS IN THE ‘349 AND ‘155 PATENTS
`
`10. Key steps for producing printed materials using a plate process include (1)
`
`preparing copy elements for reproduction, (2) prepress production, (3) platemaking, (4) printing,
`
`and (5) binding, finishing and distribution.
`
`11.
`
`In the printing production process, an “end user” prepares copy elements for
`
`reproduction. In this “design” stage of the printing process, the end user provides images and
`
`data using slides or computer files to create one or more “pages.” Pages can be designed using
`
`computer programs such as QuarkXpress, Adobe InDesign, Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, or
`
`other printing or publishing software packages. Prior to the inventions claimed in the ‘155 and
`
`‘349 patents, slides or computer disks containing pages to be printed were sent (via mail or
`
`express carrier) to be prepared for creation of a plate.
`
`12.
`
`In the prepress production stage, the end user input (or “copy”) is transformed into
`
`a medium that is reproducible for printing. Typically, prepress involves typesetting, illustration,
`
`page building and design, image capture, image color correction, file conversion, RIPing,
`
`trapping, proofing, imposition, filmsetting, and platesetting. “Proofing” involves producing a
`
`proof, or sample, of what the printed product will look like. Prior to the inventions claimed in
`
`the ‘155 and ‘349 patents, the proof was sent by mail or express carrier to the end user for review
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 3
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 4 of 13
`
`and approval. After alterations are made, new proofs are sent to the end user. Once approval of
`
`the proof is given by the end user, a medium, such as a computer to plate (CTP) file is produced
`
`and sent to the printer. “Imposition” involves the set of pages on a particular plate as well as
`
`their positioning and orientation. Imposition is particularly important in the creation of booklets
`
`or catalogs, where pages are positioned using register marks to assist in the stripping, collating,
`
`and folding of the printed product.
`
`13.
`
`In the platemaking stage, a “printer” manufactures a printing plate using the
`
`medium created during prepress. Where a CTP file is used, the printer converts the CTP file into
`
`a printing plate or goes directly to a digital press. In the printing stage, the printer uses the
`
`printing plate to create the printed product. In the binding, finishing and distribution stage, the
`
`printed product is prepared in its final form.
`
`14. Each step in the printing production process described briefly above can be
`
`accomplished using a variety of different known systems and techniques. Nevertheless, such
`
`conventional systems have many delays, particularly in the transporting of pages and proofs to
`
`and from the end user and prepress provider. Due to delays and the fragmented nature of
`
`conventional printing production systems, errors often occur. Further, typical printing production
`
`systems are limited in their ability to re-purpose data, manage content of pages, and piece
`
`together individual processes or tasks to establish an efficient production system or “workflow”.
`
`Indeed, no conventional system prior to the inventions claimed in the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents
`
`combines prepress, content management, infrastructure (server, storage & distribution) and
`
`workflow services.
`
`15. Prior to the inventions claimed in the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents, conventional printing
`
`and publishing systems generally include Macintosh computers or workstations which
`
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 4
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 5 of 13
`
`communicate with each other using the AppleTalk protocol. AppleTalk protocol could not,
`
`however, be communicated over switched networks such as the Internet and private networks
`
`where nodes in the network have IP (Internet Protocol) addresses. As such, conventional systems
`
`could not merely be coupled to a communication network for remotely controlling design,
`
`prepress and print processes.
`
`16. Prior to the inventions claimed in the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents, there was a need for a
`
`system which combines design, prepress, content management, infrastructure (server, storage &
`
`distribution) and workflow. For end users in particular, there was a need for a system and a
`
`method to gain control of the design, prepress, and print processes. To save time and costs, there
`
`was a need to eliminate manual shipping of proofs back and forth to a prepress provider.
`
`Further, there was a need for a prepress capability at a local facility without the time and costs of
`
`shipping proofs back and forth to a prepress provider. Even further, there was a need for a
`
`system and method to provide plate-ready files over a communications network for delivery to a
`
`CTP device. Moreover, for commercial printers, there was a need for a system and method to
`
`remotely drive a plate-setting device located at a printer’s facility. Further, there was a need to
`
`decrease the amount of time necessary to generate printing plates after processing of the pages
`
`(i.e., the cycle time). Even further, there was a need for providing access to the functionality of
`
`high-end server, storage, and networking equipment to the printer facility without the associated
`
`capital investments.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 5
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 6 of 13
`
`VI. INTER PARTES REVIEW DENIED
`
`17. On July 29, 2013, Printing Industries of America (“PIA”) filed a petition to institute
`
`an inter partes review proceeding with the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent
`
`Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) on July 29, 2013. This case was captioned Printing
`
`Industries of America v. CTP Innovations, LLC (Case No. IPR2013-00474) (“IPR2013-00474”).
`
`18.
`
`In IPR2013-00474, the petitioner challenged the validity of each and every claim in
`
`the ‘349 patent.
`
`19. On August 2, 2013, PIA filed a petition to institute a second inter partes review
`
`proceeding with the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`
`(“PTAB”) on July 29, 2013. This case was captioned Printing Industries of America v. CTP
`
`Innovations, LLC (Case No. IPR2013-00489) (“IPR2013-00489”).
`
`20.
`
`In IPR2013-00489, the petitioner challenged the validity of each and every claim in
`
`the ‘155 patent,
`
`21. On December 30, 2013, PTAB found that the petition in IPR2013-00489 did not
`
`demonstrate that there was a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect
`
`to invalidating at least one of the claims in the ‘155 Patent.
`
`22. A true and correct copy of PTAB’s determination in IPR2013-00489 is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 1.
`
`23. On December 31, 2013, PTAB found that the petition in IPR2013-00474 did not
`
`demonstrate that there was a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect
`
`to invalidating at least one of the claims in the ‘349 Patent.
`
`24. A true and correct copy of PTAB’s determination in IPR2013-00474 is attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 2.
`
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 6
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 7 of 13
`
`25. Although it had the opportunity to file a motion for rehearing in both IPR2013-
`
`00474 and IPR2013-00489, PIA declined to file any motion for rehearing.
`
`26.
`
`Instead, PIA requested the return of refund of its Post-Institution Fees.
`
`27. The determinations by PTAB in IPR2013-00474 and IPR2013-00489 are not
`
`appealable.
`
`VII. INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘349 AND ‘155 PATENTS IS “UBIQUITOUS”
`
`28. Upon information and belief, PIA is the largest trade association representing the
`
`printing and graphic communications industry in the United States.
`
`29. Michael Makin, president and CEO of PIA (petitioner in IPR2013-00474 and
`
`IPR2013-00489) testified before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, that the inventions in
`
`the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents
`
`relate[ ] to how a digital file, like a PDF file, is handled and manipulated in a print
`production operation up until the time it is used to image a printing plate. This
`method of digital workflow and plate imaging was new in the 1990s when the
`patent was issued but has become ubiquitous in the industry now.
`
`Statement of Michael F. Makin, MBA, President & CEO of Printing Industries of America,
`
`Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, titled “Protecting Small Business and Promoting
`
`Innovation by Limiting Patent Troll Abuse,” dated December 17, 2013 (the “PIA Statement”), at
`
`4-5 (emphasis in original). A true and correct copy of the PIA Statement is attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit 3.
`
`30.
`
`In so making this statement, it is clear that Makin and PIA were able to determine
`
`from the face of the ‘349 and ‘155 Patents that infringement of the ‘349 and ‘155 was
`
`“ubiquitous in the industry now.”
`
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 7
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 8 of 13
`
`VIII. CAUSES OF ACTION
`
`COUNT I
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,611,349
`
`31. CTP incorporates the preceding paragraphs 1-30 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`32. CTP owns, by assignment, the ‘349 Patent entitled “System and Method of
`
`Generating a Printing Plate File in Real Time Using a Communication Network.” A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘349 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
`
`33. Upon information and belief, Defendant, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, has
`
`infringed, literally or through the doctrine of equivalents, and continues to infringe the ‘349
`
`Patent through Defendant’s making, using, selling, and/or offering for sale in the United States,
`
`and specifically in this district, at least printing and publishing services that involve the
`
`generation of a plate-ready file in real time using a communication network that includes,
`
`without limitation, storage; content management; infrastructure; and the workflow involved with
`
`the generation of plate-ready files (the “Infringing Services”).
`
`34. Defendant has not given the Infringing Services a specific and publicly-available
`
`name. Accordingly, Plaintiff cannot provide the name used by Defendant for such services
`
`without the benefit of discovery.
`
`35. Exemplary Infringing Services include, without limitation, systems and methods
`
`used by Defendant in connection with, at least, its offset sheet-fed and web printing services that
`
`involve workflows related to plate-ready files and/or the generation of such files.
`
`36. Exemplary Infringing Services do not include variable data printing because that
`
`type of printing does not involve the generation of a plate-ready file.
`
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 8
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 9 of 13
`
`37. Defendant has sufficient experience and knowledge of computer to plate
`
`technology generally, and of its systems and methods specifically, to determine which of its
`
`systems and methods involve the generation of plate-ready files.
`
`38. Defendant has sufficient experience and knowledge of computer to plate
`
`technology generally, and of its systems and methods specifically, to determine which of its
`
`systems and methods do not involve the generation of plate-ready files.
`
`39. Defendant has had actual notice of the ‘349 Patent since at least as early as the date
`
`of service of the initial complaint filed in this case.
`
`40. On information and belief, Defendant will continue to infringe the ‘349 Patent
`
`unless enjoined by this Court.
`
`41. On information and belief, Defendant’s infringement of the ‘349 Patent is, has
`
`been, and continues to be willful and deliberate in whole or in part because the Defendant
`
`received notice of infringement at least as of receipt of the complaint in this action yet continues
`
`to engage in its infringing conduct.
`
`42. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of the ‘349 Patent,
`
`CTP has been and continues to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined.
`
`43. Unless Defendant’s ongoing infringement is enjoined, CTP will suffer irreparable
`
`injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law.
`
`44. This is an exceptional case such that CTP should be entitled to its reasonable
`
`attorney fees and expenses incurred in prosecuting this action and defending any counterclaims
`
`brought by Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 9
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 10 of 13
`
`COUNT II
`
`INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,738,155
`
`45. CTP incorporates the preceding paragraphs 1-30 as though fully set forth herein.
`
`46. CTP owns, by assignment, the ‘155 Patent entitled “System and Method of
`
`Providing Publishing and Printing Services Via a Communications Network.” A true and correct
`
`copy of the ‘155 Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
`
`47. Defendant, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271, has infringed, literally or through the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, and continues to infringe the ‘155 Patent through Defendant’s making,
`
`using, selling, and/or offering for sale in the United States, and specifically in this district, at
`
`least printing and publishing services via a communication network that include, without
`
`limitation, the Infringing Services.
`
`48. Defendant has not given the Infringing Services a specific and publicly-available
`
`name. Accordingly, Plaintiff cannot provide the name used by Defendant for such services
`
`without the benefit of discovery.
`
`49. Exemplary Infringing Services include, without, limitation the systems and
`
`methods used by Defendant in connection with, at least, its offset sheet-fed and web printing
`
`services that involve workflows related to plate-ready files and/or the generation of such files.
`
`50. Exemplary Infringing Services do not include variable data printing because that
`
`type of printing does not involve the generation of a plate-ready file.
`
`51. Defendant has sufficient experience and knowledge of computer to plate
`
`technology generally, and of its systems and methods specifically, to determine which of its
`
`systems and methods involve the generation of plate-ready files.
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 10
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 11 of 13
`
`52. Defendant has had actual notice of the ‘155 Patent since at least as early as the date
`
`of service of the initial complaint filed in this case.
`
`53. On information and belief, Defendant will continue to infringe the ‘155 Patent
`
`unless enjoined by this Court.
`
`54. On information and belief, Defendant’s infringement of the ‘155 Patent is, has
`
`been, and continues to be willful and deliberate in whole or in part because the Defendant
`
`received notice of infringement at least as of receipt of the complaint in this action yet continues
`
`to engage in its infringing conduct.
`
`55. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s infringement of the ‘155 Patent,
`
`CTP has been and continues to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined.
`
`56. Unless Defendant’s ongoing infringement is enjoined, CTP will suffer irreparable
`
`injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law.
`
`57. This is an exceptional case such that CTP should be entitled to its reasonable
`
`attorney fees and expenses incurred in prosecuting this action and defending any counterclaims
`
`brought by Defendant.
`
`IX. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
`
`Wherefore, CTP requests the following relief:
`
`1. A judgment in favor of CTP that Defendant has infringed the ‘349 Patent and that
`
`such infringement was willful;
`
`2. A judgment in favor of CTP that Defendant has infringed the ‘155 Patent and that
`
`such infringement was willful;
`
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 11
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 12 of 13
`
`3. A permanent injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, agents,
`
`servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all other actors
`
`acting in active concert therewith from infringing the ‘349 Patent;
`
`4. A permanent injunction enjoining Defendant and its officers, directors, agents,
`
`servants, affiliates, employees, divisions, branches, subsidiaries, parents, and all other actors
`
`acting in active concert therewith from infringing the ‘155 Patent;
`
`5. A judgment and order requiring Defendant to pay CTP its damages in an amount
`
`not less than a reasonable royalty, treble damages, costs, expenses, and prejudgment and post-
`
`judgment interest for Defendant’s infringement of the ‘349 Patent, as provided under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`284;
`
`6. A judgment and order requiring Defendant to pay CTP its damages in an amount
`
`not less than a reasonable royalty, treble damages, costs, expenses, and prejudgment and post-
`
`judgment interest for Defendant’s infringement of the ‘155 Patent, as provided under 35 U.S.C. §
`
`284;
`
`7. A judgment and order finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of
`
`35 U.S.C. § 285, and awarding to CTP its reasonable attorney fees and expenses; and
`
`8. Any and all other relief that the Court deems just and proper.
`
`X. JURY DEMAND
`
`CTP requests a jury for all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 12
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 13 of 13
`
`
`
` Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN,
`CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Marisa Rosen
`Marisa Rosen, Florida Bar No. 73152
`SunTrust Center
`200 South Orange Avenue
`Post Office Box 1549
`Orlando, Florida 32802
`Telephone: (407) 422-6600
`Telecopier: (407) 841-0325
`Email: mrosen@bakerdonelson.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Attorney for CTP Innovations, LLC
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 13
`
`

`

`JS 44 (Rev. 12/12)
`
`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 1 of 2
`CIVIL COVER SHEET
`
`The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
`provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose
`of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.) NOTICE: Attorneys MUST Indicate All Re-filed Cases Below.
`
`I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
`
`CTP INNOVATIONS, LLC
`
`DEFENDANTS
`ORIGINAL IMPRESSIONS, LLC
`
`(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff
`Hamilton County, IN
`(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
`
`County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
`
`(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
`
`(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
`Marisa Rosen
`Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell and Berkowitz
`200 South Orange Avenue
`(d) Check County Where Action Arose:
`
`✔
`
`MIAMI- DADE
`
`MONROE
`
`II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
`
`1 U.S. Government
`
`✔
`
`3
`
`Federal Question
`
`Plaintiff
`
`(U.S. Government Not a Party)
`
`NOTE:
`
`
`Attorneys (If Known)
`
`IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
`THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
`
`BROWARD
`
`PALM BEACH
`
`MARTIN
`
`ST. LUCIE
`
`INDIAN RIVER
`
`OKEECHOBEE HIGHLANDS
`
`III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff)
`(For Diversity Cases Only)
` and One Box for Defendant)
`
`PTF
`Incorporated or Principal Place
`of Business In This State
`
`DEF
`
`4
`
`4
`
` PTF
`
`DEF
`
`Citizen of This State
`
`1
`
`1
`
`2 U.S. Government
`Defendant
`
`4
`
`Diversity
`(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
`
`Citizen of Another State
`
`Citizen or Subject of a
` Foreign Country
`
`2
`
`3
`
`2
`
`Incorporated and Principal Place
`of Business In Another State
`
`3
`
`Foreign Nation
`
`5
`
`6
`
`5
`
`6
`
`FORFEITURE/PENALTY
`
`BANKRUPTCY
`
`OTHER STATUTES
`
`IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
`CONTRACT
`TORTS
`
`110 Insurance
`120 Marine
`130 Miller Act
`140 Negotiable Instrument
`150 Recovery of Overpayment
`& Enforcement of Judgment
`151 Medicare Act
`152 Recovery of Defaulted
`Student Loans
`(Excl. Veterans)
`153 Recovery of Overpayment
`of Veteran’s Benefits
`160 Stockholders’ Suits
`190 Other Contract
`195 Contract Product Liability
`196 Franchise
`
`REAL PROPERTY
`210 Land Condemnation
`220 Foreclosure
`
` PERSONAL INJURY
`310 Airplane
`315 Airplane Product
`Liability
`320 Assault, Libel &
`Slander
`330 Federal Employers’
`Liability
`340 Marine
`345 Marine Product
`Liability
`350 Motor Vehicle
`355 Motor Vehicle
`Product Liability
`360 Other Personal
`Injury
`362 Personal Injury -
`Med. Malpractice
`CIVIL RIGHTS
`440 Other Civil Rights
`441 Voting
`
`230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
`
`442 Employment
`
`240 Torts to Land
`
`245 Tort Product Liability
`290 All Other Real Property
`
`443 Housing/
`Accommodations
`445 Amer. w/Disabilities -
`Employment
`446 Amer. w/Disabilities -
`Other
`448 Education
`
` PERSONAL INJURY
`365 Personal Injury -
`Product Liability
`367 Health Care/
`Pharmaceutical
`Personal Injury
`Product Liability
`368 Asbestos Personal
`Injury Product
`Liability
`PERSONAL PROPERTY
`370 Other Fraud
`371 Truth in Lending
`380 Other Personal
`Property Damage
`385 Property Damage
`Product Liability
`
`PRISONER PETITIONS
`Habeas Corpus:
`463 Alien Detainee
`510 Motions to Vacate
`Sentence
`
`Other:
`
`530 General
`535 Death Penalty
`540 Mandamus & Other
`550 Civil Rights
`555 Prison Condition
`560 Civil Detainee –
`Conditions of
`Confinement
`
`625 Drug Related Seizure
`of Property 21 USC 881
`690 Other
`
`422 Appeal 28 USC 158
`423 Withdrawal
`28 USC 157
`
`PROPERTY RIGHTS
`820 Copyrights
`830 Patent
`840 Trademark
`
`✘
`
`SOCIAL SECURITY
`861 HIA (1395ff)
`862 Black Lung (923)
`863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
`864 SSID Title XVI
`865 RSI (405(g))
`
`FEDERAL TAX SUITS
`870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
`or Defendant)
`871 IRS—Third Party 26
`USC 7609
`
`
`
`
`
`LABOR
`710 Fair Labor Standards
`Act
`720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations
`740 Railway Labor Act
`751 Family and Medical
`Leave Act
`790 Other Labor Litigation
`791 Empl. Ret. Inc.
`Security Act
`
`IMMIGRATION
`462 Naturalization Application
`465 Other Immigration
`Actions
`
`375 False Claims Act
`400 State Reapportionment
`410 Antitrust
`430 Banks and Banking
`450 Commerce
`460 Deportation
`470 Racketeer Influenced and
`Corrupt Organizations
`480 Consumer Credit
`490 Cable/Sat TV
`850 Securities/Commodities/
`Exchange
`890 Other Statutory Actions
`891 Agricultural Acts
`893 Environmental Matters
`895 Freedom of Information
`Act
`896 Arbitration
`899 Administrative Procedure
`Act/Review or Appeal of
`Agency Decision
`950 Constitutionality of State
`Statutes
`
`V. ORIGIN
`✔
`1 Original
`Proceeding
`
`(Place an “X” in One Box Only)
`3 Re-filed (See
`2 Removed from
`VI below)
`State Court
`
`4 Reinstated or
`Reopened
`
`5
`
`
`
`Transferred from
`another district
`(specify)
`
`6 Multidistrict
`Litigation
`
`Appeal to
`District
`Judge from
`Magistrate
`Judgment
`
`7
`
`8 Remanded from
`Appellate Court
`
`VI. RELATED/
`RE-FILED CASE(S)
`
`a) Re-filed Case
`
`YES
`
`NO b) Related Cases YES
`
`NO
`
`(See instructions):
`
`DOCKET NUMBER
`JUDGE
`Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and Write a Brief Statement of Cause (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
`35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
`LENGTH OF TRIAL via
`days estimated (for both sides to try entire case)
`DEMAND $
`Injunction and Damages
`
`CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
`✔
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`VII. CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`
`
`VIII. REQUESTED IN
`COMPLAINT:
`ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE & CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
`DATE
`SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
`s/ Marisa Rosen
`
`
`CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION
`UNDER F.R.C.P. 23
`
`JURY DEMAND:
`
`FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
`
`RECEIPT # _____________
`
`AMOUNT ___________
`
`IFP _____________
`
`
`
`JUDGE ___________________________ MAG JUDGE _________________
`
`PETITIONERS Ex. 1012, p. 14
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-21498-FAM Document 1-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/25/2014 Page 2 of 2
`
`JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/12)
`
`INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44
`
`Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
`
`The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
`required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
`required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
`Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
`
`(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
`I.
`only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the
`official, giving both name and title.
`
`(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
`time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
`condemnation cases, the county of residence of the “defendant” is the location of the tract of land involved.)
`
`(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment,
`noting in this section “(see attachment)”.
`
`Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.C.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an “X” in
`II.
`one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
`
`United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
`
`United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an “X” in this box.
`
`Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the
`Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and
`box 1 or 2 should be marked.
`
`Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of
`the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)
`
`III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
`section for each principal party.
`
`Nature of Suit. Place an “X” in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is
`IV.
`sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerks in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature
`of suit, select the most definitive.
`
`V.
`
`Origin. Place an “X” in one of the seven boxes.
`
`Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
`
`Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the
`petition for removal is granted, check this box.
`
`Refiled (3) Attach copy of Order for Dismissal of Previous case. Also complete VI.
`
`Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
`
`Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict
`litigation transfers.
`
`Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check